Poltoraks Ugly Head Pops Out- More Propaganda

WIS EXCLUSIVE:  Desperate people do desperate things.

The Mosrim/Meshichistim attack first, then they attack you again for defending yourself.

Once again WIS is the first to expose  the Mosrim evil agendas.

WIS is about to show you something that most of the Mosrim [themselves] have not even seen yet.

As a real  sign of desperation, the people that bought us the ‘NO DIRT POLICY’ are about to get very very dirty. These same people  made it a point to cry about how unfair it was that others were calling them names (like the Mosrim they really are), are about to break their very own rules and begin a very nasty smear campaign.

They are afraid, really afraid and they should be.
Make no mistake my friends and neighbors, this is all the gangster Elie Poloraks head. We voted the gangster Polorak out once, we must do it again.

A vote for Brownstein is a vote for Polorak and Co. Vote NO to MESIRA!!!

What your about to see…
is a tactic these Mosrim, thugs and gangsters have been using for years. First thing they do is try to paint their opponent at the evil aggressor, beating on poor little them, the “victims”.
Yankle Spritzer did this with the Hershkops years ago.

Recently with the Shomrim Six Mesira, the Mosrim tired the same thing (For a reminder click HERE).

Even with the Mesira against the Rabonim, the mosrim did the same Shtick, calling the Rabbi’s gang and all.

We are on to your propaganda and we are not falling for it. You Elie Polorak, Mendle Hendel, Yankle Spritzer and Co. Are the aggressors, the violent ones and the Mosrim.

Just for the fact that the Mosrim are so afraid of Shea Hecht is enough reason to vote for Shea. If the Mosrim don’t like him, that means hes worth something, he must be doing good things!

Shea Hecht spoke against Mesira…

Op-Ed: R. Shea Hecht on the Court Case of the Shomrim 6: A Very Sad Day for Klal Yisroel, and Lubavitch

The Mosrim don’t like that!


8 Responses to “Poltoraks Ugly Head Pops Out- More Propaganda”

  1. WhoIsShmira? Says:

    המוסרים [מלשינים] והאפיקורסין מישראל היה דין לאבדן ביד ולהורידן עד באר שחת מפני שהיו מצירים לישראל ומסירין את העם מאחרי ה

    What is a Moser?

    שלחן ערוך אדמו”ר הזקן – לחץ כאן

    רמב”ם- הלכות חובל ומזיק פרק שמיני -לחץ כאן

    Rabbi Osdoba: “I Never C”V Gave Permission for Messira”

  2. Peach? Achdus? Says:

    Atleast now we know whos running that “peaceful” site —–. Its non other then our very own gangster, Elie Poltroak.

  3. Shomrim Six Says:

    I’m still waiting for the 749 video to come out, so we all can see the truth behind who were the aggressors.

  4. Shomrim Six Says:

    After being found NOT GUILTY- INNOCENT, as a result of a six week long trial of six of our fellow Jews.

    When asked [by one of the Shomrim Six] after the ‘Meet The Candidates’, how come he and his “Achdus team” stood silence when six of his fellow Jews stood trial, facing up to 15 years jail as a result of a vicious Mesira – Blood Libel?

    Fishel Brownstein states: “But you guys did hit the Bochrim”

    After a six week trial and over 3000 pages of testimony, Fishel Brownstein and his “Achdus team” show true Achdus for fellow Jews.

  5. mosrim Says:

  6. CHER Says:

    what are the point of the pictures of Shea, what are they trying to show, i dont see any hitting.
    the is pure propaganda.

    I think Shea stands a huge change of wining and that scares the living daylights out of them.

  7. john doe Says:

    Being that a mosser should be thrown into the deepest pit, it’s too bad that when Shea removed hendel from the stage there was no deep pit around.

  8. Machne Menachem Says:

    On May 6, 1997, the plaintiffs [Spritzer], a not-for-profit Corporation and Yaakov Spritzer, filed a complaint against seven named defendants consisting of 167 paragraphs extending over 50 pages and asserting eleven claims as follows:
    I) RICO, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1962(b);
    II) RICO, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d);
    III) RICO, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c);
    IV) RICO, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d);
    V) Tortuous Interference with Contractual Relations;
    VI) Fraud;
    VII) Conversion;
    VIII) Unfair Competition;
    IX) Breach of Fiduciary Duty;
    X) Assault;
    XI) Intentional damages to property.

    To characterize the complaint as prolix, replete with hearsay and irrelevancies, would be charitable.

    [From Judge Glassers final verdict].
    For more info visit: machnemenachem.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: